suspects

WASHINGTON  — A divided Supreme Court heard arguments Monday on whether the police use of phone tracking data violates the Constitution’s protection against “unreasonable searches.”

Most of the justices sounded wary of barring investigators from obtaining precise location history from Google or cellphone providers if it helps find a murderer or a bank robber.

“I’m trying to figure out why this was bad police work,” Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh told an attorney representing the defendant, Odell Chatrie.

He said a police detective in Virginia was seeking clues to find a bank robber and sought a “geofence warrant” from a judge that told Google to turn over data from phones that were near the bank during the hour of the robbery.

“In the end, he got three names,” Kavanaugh said, including Chatrie, who pleaded guilty. He said these searches have proved to be practical for finding criminals.

But other justices said the court should not rule broadly to endorse digital searches of vast data bases held by private companies.

What about emails or Google photos, asked Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Neil M. Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett.

All three said this information deserves more privacy protection than location data.

In the past, the court has said the 4th Amendment protects against government searches that intrude upon a “reasonable expectation of privacy.” The two sides in this case differ on whether a digital search of location data violates privacy rights.

Gorsuch said he was generally skeptical of broad searches if the government had no particular suspect.

Is it OK to search “all the rooms in a hotel for a gun or all the storage units or all bank deposit boxes for the pearl necklace that has been stolen?” he asked.

Eric Feigin, a deputy solicitor general, said the government probably could not obtain a search warrant for all storage units or hotel rooms, but a Google search is different because it is a software filter.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. proposed a narrow ruling.

Perhaps unwittingly, Chatrie had agreed to have Google store his location history data. Roberts said he could have turned off the public location data, and for that reason, he may have lost his right to appeal.

“If you don’t want the government to have your location history, you just flip that off,” he said.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. agreed. Chatrie “voluntarily disclosed to Google the information about where he was going to be,” he said.

Eight years ago, Roberts wrote an opinion for a 5-4 majority that said investigators needed a search warrant before they could obtain 127 days of cell tower records that helped convict a Michigan man of several store robberies.

Four of the court’s liberal justices joined that majority, but only two of them — Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — remain on the court.

Since then, Kavanaugh, Barrett and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson have joined the court.

The National Assn. of Criminal Defense Lawyers and other civil liberties groups backed Chatrie’s challenge to the government’s use of geofence warrants.

Chatrie had “a reasonable expectation of privacy in his location history given both its sensitive and revealing nature and the fact that it was stored in his password-protected account,” Washington attorney Adam Unikowski told the court. “There was not probable cause to search the virtual private papers of every single person within the geofence merely because of their proximity to the crime.”

Feigin, the Justice Department attorney, said a ruling for Chatrie “would impede the investigation of kidnappings, robberies, shootings and other crimes.”

He agreed, however, that email should be protected because it involves personal communication.

The justices will hand down a ruling in Chatrie vs. U.S. by the end of June.

The Metropolitan police said the three men were charged with arson ‘being reckless as to whether life would be endangered’. 

Two British nationals and one UK-Pakistani national have been remanded in custody after they appeared in a court charged with arson in relation to four ambulances owned by a Jewish charity in London that were torched.

The March 23 attack in Golders Green, an area of North London with a large Jewish community, destroyed four ambulances belonging to the volunteer organisation Hatzola.

Two of the suspects were identified by police on Saturday as British nationals, Hamza Iqbal, 20, and Rehan Khan, 19. The third suspect, a 17-year-old UK-Pakistani dual national, cannnot be named for legal reasons.

According to a statement by the Metropolitan Police, the three suspects, who had been arrested at different locations in East London on Wednesday, were charged with arson and “being reckless as to whether life would be endangered”.

The suspects did not enter a plea in a 45-minute appearance at the Westminster Magistrates Court.

The court heard that British police also arrested a fourth person in connection with the arson attack.

‘Deeply shocking’

The ambulances that were set on fire were run by Hatzola, a volunteer organisation which provides free medical transportation and emergency response primarily for the Orthodox Jewish community.

According to the London Fire Brigade, the explosions from cylinders on the vehicles had shattered nearby windows, but no one was injured.

Since the fire, the police have promised to increase security around Jewish community sites across the capital.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer described the incident as a “deeply shocking antisemitic arson attack”.

The police have said they are treating the incident as an anti-Semitic hate crime. So far, the incident has not been declared a “terror offence”, but counterterrorism officers are leading the investigation.

The three defendants are set to appear at London’s Central Criminal Court, better known as the Old Bailey, on April 24.

The Iran-aligned Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamiya (HAYI) group claimed responsibility for the attack. It has also previously claimed responsibility for similar attacks in Belgium and the Netherlands.

March 24 (UPI) — Authorities in Washington, D.C., are hunting for at least two suspects after a U.S. Park Police officer was shot while on undercover duty in the nation’s capital.

The shooting occurred at about 7:30 p.m. EDT Monday near the 5000 block of Queens Stroll Place SE and the 4600 block of Hillside Road SE, the Metropolitan Police Department said in a statement.

U.S. Park Police Deputy Chief Scott Bretch told reporters in a press conference that the officer was riding in an unmarked police car as part of an ongoing U.S. Park Police investigation when the office was “ambushed” by at least two gunmen.

The officer was struck by gunfire, he said. Authorities said police did not return fire.

Bretch said the police vehicle continued down the street until it pulled over, where the wounded officer received first aid before being airlifted to the hospital with non-life-threatening injuries.

Bretch would not say what kind of investigation U.S. Park Police was working on or how the suspects fled the scene. It was unclear how many police officers were in the targeted police car.

Interim Metropolitan Police Chief Jeff Carroll said that they believe the suspects had targeted the U.S. Park Police officer in the vehicle for being law enforcement.

Authorities are searching for two suspects both described as Black males. One was dressed in a white hoodie with blue jeans, and the other was dressed all in black with a white stripe down his sleeves and pant legs.

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser said she had been briefed on the shooting.

“Our prayers are with the officer for a quick recovery and we are grateful for all our law enforcement officers and first responders for their quick response,” she said in a statement.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said she was also briefed on the shooting by Bowser and Carroll, stating the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies will assist the Metropolitan Police Department “in any way we can.

“Please pray for the officer’s recovery,” she said.